MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243541618 · doi:10.1109/tgrs.2015.2474132

Intrinsic Representation of Hyperspectral Imagery for Unsupervised Feature Extraction

2015· article· en· W2243541618 on OpenAlexafffund
Linlin Xu, Alexander Wong, Fan Li, David A. Clausi

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote Sensing · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRemote-Sensing Image Classification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersCanadian Space AgencyNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsHyperspectral imagingPattern recognition (psychology)Discriminative modelArtificial intelligencePrincipal component analysisComputer scienceFeature extractionBoosting (machine learning)Representation (politics)Feature (linguistics)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Unsupervised feature extraction from hyperspectral images (HSIs) relies on efficient data representation. However, classical data representation techniques, e.g., principal component analysis and independent component analysis, do not reflect the intrinsic characteristics of HSI, and as such, they are less efficient for producing discriminative features. To address this issue, we have developed an intrinsic representation (IR) approach to support HSI classification. Based on the linear spectral mixture model, the IR approach explains the underlying physical factors that are responsible for generating HSI. Moreover, it addresses other important characteristics of HSI, i.e., the noise variance heterogeneity effect in the spectral domain and the spatial correlation effect in image domain. The IR model is solved iteratively by alternating the estimation of IR coefficients given IR bases and the update of IR bases given the coefficients. The resulting IR coefficients are discriminative, compact, and noise resistant, thereby constituting powerful features for improved HSI classification. The experiments on both simulated and real HSI demonstrate that the features extracted by the IR model are more capable of boosting the classification performance than the other referenced techniques.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Geoscience and Remote SensingSame topicRemote-Sensing Image ClassificationFrench-language works237,207